| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 26527 | 2002-10-29 09:36:00 | Partitioning Hardrive | Berryb (654) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 94264 | 2002-10-29 09:36:00 | Yep check the FAQ but didn't help. I have Win2k running on one partition. I now have some kids games that don't run on win2k and want to install win98. Question - can I create another partition (I have Partition Magic) and install Win98se on it. Will Win2k recognise Win98 and allow to dual boot? Or do I have to reformat and start again. I have dual booted the two OS before but installed Win98 first. Cheers | Berryb (654) | ||
| 94265 | 2002-10-29 09:41:00 | From the FAQ's The order for install Operating Systems is as follows (cross out those OS’s you don’t wish to install, and you will be left with the order to install your specific set of OS’s): MS-DOS Windows 3.1 Windows NT Windows 95 Windows 98 Windows ME Windows 2000 Windows XP The general rule is that the newer the OS, the later it is in the install list. Does that answer your question? (You should not install 98 after 2k, should be the other way around) But you have read them anyway... |
godfather (25) | ||
| 94266 | 2002-10-29 09:50:00 | No. Not specific enough. The word “general rule” does not mean this is the only way it can be done. If the only order to dual boot is to install the older OS version first then why have the wording “general rule”. If this is the only option then that’s fine but this is not the way I read the FAQ hence the question. | Berryb (654) | ||
| 94267 | 2002-10-29 09:55:00 | BerryB, Some of us (well me in particular I guess) can and do install Windows operating systems in different orders to the FAQ mentioned... and for those who really know what they are doing this works. However the general/usual/call-it-what-you-like rule is oldest thru newest windows O/S installations. Cheers, Babe. |
Babe Ruth (416) | ||
| 94268 | 2002-10-29 10:08:00 | Thanks Babe I know my way around a computer and have dual booted a few systems but not with the OS in the order I want. So if it is possible then is it a matter of changing the boot file etc or is it more invovled. Thanks |
Berryb (654) | ||
| 94269 | 2002-10-29 10:18:00 | BerryB, Hmmm on the spot here . . . Ok I'll state publicly I tend to follow the old to new O/S installs . Privately I have documented methods by which I do things differently . Cheers, Babe . |
Babe Ruth (416) | ||
| 94270 | 2002-10-29 10:50:00 | It's really more a matter of making a primary partition active and visible and hiding the other primary partitions, i.e. only ONE active and visible primary partition is allowed at any one time. I haven't tried myself to do what you are trying to do so I can't speak from experience, only what I've read on this. I have a dual-booting PC myself but it isn't two flavours of Windows (it's Win98Se and Linux). Linux is heaps more flexible about where it is installed and works fine on an extended partition. Check out these links, they might be useful to you- A good 'how-to' about partitioning: Multi-booting Windows (www.pcnineoneone.com) Some good tips here too: Ranish Parition Manager (www.ranish.com) |
Rod J (451) | ||
| 94271 | 2002-10-29 18:13:00 | Hi BerryB, After reading all the posts on this problem, I did some searching for an answer . I know that most people say that you must put 98 on before XP, but I had the same scenario . So I found a page that will let you do just that, tried it and it worked, I now have 98 and XP duel booting, and this is after installing XP first . Here is the link to the page . dougknox . com/xp/tips/xp_repair_9x . htm" target="_blank">www . dougknox . com I hope this helps, altho I don't know if it works for 2000 . Please do everything exactly as it says and it should work for you . Regards Repo74 :) |
Repo74 (2384) | ||
| 94272 | 2002-10-29 19:13:00 | My older version of PM has a boot manager program, so as Rod J says its just a question of making another primary partition and using a boot manager to hide and/or make each active as required when booting up. I cant see that the order or whether Win2k recognises Win98 matters if you use a boot manager. Or am I being naive and way out of date? Does the later PM version not have a boot manager type program? It's what I used to do when I had Win95, OS/2, and Win98 in separate partitions. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 94273 | 2002-10-29 22:18:00 | It is possible, and in a previous thread on the same subject, a good reply to the problem was posted by Merlin . Here's One ( . co . nz/thread . jsp?forum=1&thread=25737&message=91456&q=dual+boot#91456" target="_blank">pressf1 . co . nz) The above thread was not the one I recall, but the problem arises when you install the older OS, it overwrites the boot sector, AND the 98 partition is required to be the active partition . If you install 98 and then make it the active partition, you will have problems with the NTLDR file (NT boot Loader) . Have a search on Google for reasons why, but the link posted by Merlin contains a fix for this problem . It is messy, but once you get it working, you will be fine . G P |
Graham Petrie (449) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||